Reality of 2-Nation Theory

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

India ain't rich now either, so what's the point
We really f
Don't want them to join. We can't really feed so many more mouths. We have our own problems.

India is shining growth and progressing on multiple fronts... India now a days have a dominance in groups which traditionally used to be under Pakistan influence

And most importantly majority of us in India doesn't want that "United India" you are talking about. We are not ready to bear the burden of some other nut case. Not worth it..

Even if it is 2/3/multiple nation theory it hardly makes a difference for us... Hardly any news for us

Dominance in what groups? Can you be specific and concise?

 

[Cookie Monster]

Two nation theory died when Pakistan accepted the accession of Jamnagar. You could no longer then claim that Hindus and Muslims were separate nations

It was Junagadh not Jamnagar and u(among many others like u here) don't know crap about the subject. Better for u to just stay quiet.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Two nation theory died when Pakistan accepted the accession of Jamnagar. You could no longer then claim that Hindus and Muslims were separate nations

The theory of a "united india" died in 1947. india has no justifiable reason to exist anymore. Pakistan and bangladesh never rejoined india. Therefore the 2/3 nation theory is alive and kicking whereas the theory of a "united india" died nearly 73 years ago.

 

[kris]

If the 2-nation theory was not successful, then bangladesh would have become a part of india again. 1971 in fact validated and strengthened the 2-nation theory into the 3 nation theory. If the 2 nation theory EVER fails, then both bangladesh and Pakistan would be merged into india. NEVER HAPPENING!

Then let's say if these countries break

Dominance in what groups? Can you be specific and concise?

OIC

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Then let's say if these countries break

OIC

How does india dominate OIC? Can you explain and be specific?

 

[kris]

If the 2-nation theory was not successful, then bangladesh would have become a part of india again. 1971 in fact validated and strengthened the 2-nation theory into the 3 nation theory. If the 2 nation theory EVER fails, then both bangladesh and Pakistan would be merged into india. NEVER HAPPENING!

I call it a moot point, some person brings a hypothetical concept called two nation theory just to satisfy his political ambitions and it's proven a failure with in 25 years...
Why should Bengalis join india in total after they got their own country after a bloody civil war! Which is not practical for both sides.

Nepal even bein hindu didnt join india after independence... they chose their own path

Come out of that absurdity... If our neighborhood breaks again into multiple countries in future will you give a new name to the theory because they will stay independent and won't join us

There was an india like that which no more exists. Secondly we do have our on examples of minorities rising to high ranks despite having a much smaller minority

A country that directly inhibits by law non muslims rise in their political arena should not compare itself with india

How does india dominate OIC? Can you explain and be specific?

Domination over Pakistan....
Your diplomats were just asked to take a back seat

By that definition, india also disintegrated and is dead when it lost over 35% of it's former territory in the creation of Pakistan. Whereas bangladesh is barely 17% the size of Pakistan. All 1947 and 1971 proved was that you can't form a single nation with people Who are completely different to you in terms of race and DNA. Especially if they are 2750 kms away from you. Nothing else.

Disintegration is when it happens against its interests or wishes. We wanted the country to be divided

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

I call it a moot point, some person brings a hypothetical concept called two nation theory just to satisfy his political ambitions and it's proven a failure with in 25 years...
Why should Bengalis join india in total after they got their own country after a bloody civil war! Which is not practical for both sides.

Nepal even bein hindu didnt join india after independence... they chose their own path

Come out of that absurdity... If our neighborhood breaks again into multiple countries in future will you give a new name to the theory because they will stay independent and won't join us


A country that directly inhibits by law non muslims rise in their political arena should not compare itself with india

You are simply proving that the 2/3 nation theory is correct. That it is not feasible or practical for nepal, bangladesh etc to merge back with india. That the theory of a "United india" is a miserable failure. Hence there is now no justifiable reason for india to exist as it has lost so much territory.

 

[kris]

By that definition, india also disintegrated and is dead when it lost over 35% of it's former territory in the creation of Pakistan. Whereas bangladesh is barely 17% the size of Pakistan. All 1947 and 1971 proved was that you can't form a single nation with people Who are completely different to you in terms of race and DNA. Especially if they are 2750 kms away from you. Nothing else.

No, you missed the point
A nation is formed on mutual interests not single point agendas

You are simply proving that the 2/3 nation theory is correct. That it is not feasible or practical for nepal, bangladesh etc to merge back with india. That the theory of a "United india" is a miserable failure. Hence there is now no justifiable reason for india to exist as it has lost so much territory.

First nepal was never with india...
Second, I already said we don't want the misery of United india

We just traded of land for peace. We got it.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

I call it a moot point, some person brings a hypothetical concept called two nation theory just to satisfy his political ambitions and it's proven a failure with in 25 years...
Why should Bengalis join india in total after they got their own country after a bloody civil war! Which is not practical for both sides.

Nepal even bein hindu didnt join india after independence... they chose their own path

Come out of that absurdity... If our neighborhood breaks again into multiple countries in future will you give a new name to the theory because they will stay independent and won't join us


A country that directly inhibits by law non muslims rise in their political arena should not compare itself with india


Domination over Pakistan....
Your diplomats were just asked to take a back seat



Disintegration is when it happens against its interests or wishes. We wanted the country to be divided

So indians WANTED Pakistan to be created in 1947? They were not against the idea? So the idea of a "United india" was never wanted by indians? So even by your own admission, india today has no justifiable reason to exist as indians are not concerned about losing territory.
Is this why india has ceded 39,000 square kms of it's territory to China?:

https://eurasiantimes.com/china-has...f-indian-land-in-ladakh-arunachal-india-govt/

 

[kris]

We are discussing Two Nation Theory, not the Partition of India.

Partition of India happened because some people thought Hindus and Muslims cant stay Togther ( wrong as They are existing together in India after 70 years ) and that Muslims separately from Hindus Can exist Peacefully ( wrong again, since BD got away ).

Focus on Two Nation Theory and its Validity.

The whole basis of this stupid theory is all muslims are brothers and will stay together for ever...
A country was born on single point agenda couldn't cope up to reality and gave away ....

With the same stupidity they have significant ongoing seccessionist movements yet for which we are blamed

India is a communal shithole

It is a communal disaster

The hatred poison toxicity amongst Indians is incredible

2 nation theory is validated but superceded by multi nation theory
India needs to be divided into multiple states

You cannot trap 1.4 billion people in such a hateful state

Wishful thinking

 

[Gentelman]

if your two nation theory was so strong why bangalis separated from you ?

Why not?
They were deemed to seperate....
Even in the cabinet mission plane by british in 1946, Bengal and Assam were placed in group C, seperate of group A.
Being seperate doesn't make them lesser muslims or lesser brothers. Their land, their choice. Though the seperation could have been less volatile and at good terms but some people with big egos.....!!!

 

[KhanBaba2]

It was Junagadh not Jamnagar and u(among many others like u here) don't know crap about the subject. Better for u to just stay quiet.

That was a slip of tongue. I have corrected it.

 

[Cookie Monster]

That was a slip of tongue. I have corrected it.

A spelling error u mean? Ur tongue wasn't involved...and in broader terms...u still haven't grasped what two nation theory was/is.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

The whole basis of this stupid theory is all muslims are brothers and will stay together for ever...
A country was born on single point agenda couldn't cope up to reality and gave away ....

With the same stupidity they have significant ongoing seccessionist movements yet for which we are blamed

india doesn't have any successionist movements then?..................What succesionist movements are there in Pakistan?............ Can you be specific and explain them?

PS Muslims may have issues with one another but nothing compared to what we would have had, had Pakistan or bangladesh not been created. That in itself is the 2-nation theory.

 

[KhanBaba2]

A spelling error u mean? Ur tongue wasn't involved...and in broader terms...u still haven't grasped what two nation theory was/is.

So tell me how does the two nation theory justify the acceptance of the accession of Junagarh